Guns in the home?

[perry]

Who is the "Mililtia" in the 2nd Ammendment to the US Constitution; and what does a Mililtia do?

In the olden days - and maybe in the future again - local townships and communities were expected to take care of their own problems.

The local mililtia was the recognized unit for doing so - under the direction of appropriate citizen leadership.

Have a problem with a band of ruffins that were beyond the ability of the county sherrif and deputies (if there was a county sherrif and deputies): the mililtia took care of it.

Have a bridge fail, or a flood, or many other things.... the local mililtia was mobilized to take care of it.

Thus, the local mililtia consisted of able bodied men, and some women, who would routinely drill together for both collective local defense and natural disasters. Because they drilled together they were "well regulated"

Should there be a major conflict (say someone trying to sieze a large area) the various local mililtias were formed toghether into a larger army.

Each mililtia member was expected to bring their own weapons, ammunition, and several days of food. Hunting, fishing, etc was also necessary for issues that took more than a day or so.

The founding fathers of the US were also concerned about federal power over-rulling local rights as well - and thus, the 2nd Ammendment in the Bill of Rights (which is about the rights of the people) focused on the need for local mililtias to ensure that local populations maintained their freedom.

Who is in the Mililtia. Every able bodies adult in the US who has not been judged mentally incompetent or unfit due to other resons - such as being a criminal.

Your town and/or township has the right to call up its citizens into a local mililtia to handle an emergency. If the town needs defending from invaders - you will be expected to show up with arms and a reasonable supply of ammo and food.

Unfortunately, no one routinely drills anymore as professional police forces and disaster agencies take care of most routine issues. But I do know of several situations where towns discussed calling up a mililtia and starting routine drills within the last 30 years.

Note that not all mililtia members routinely carried guns. Cooks, nurses, etc were always part of a fully assembled mililtia (even if they were not on the front lines). But, they did have guns and did know how to use them if needed.

Perry

 

[packrat]

We live in a relatively crime free area..the last murder in my town was..before I was born I think, and I''m 35. There''s a lot of drugs and a lot of what you would call "...trash" ..you picture a guy w/a pot belly and a wife beater tank on, pizza stain on the front, screaming at his wife on the front lawn in his boxers..yeah, we actually have that happen here.

With drugs, anything can happen..at any point in time. People get messed up on shit and they''ll break into houses, they''ll beat you, they''ll kill you. It''s random. Wrong place, wrong time. It doesn''t have to happen directly in your house, it could be at the shopping mall-which happened in Omaha a couple years ago and people died. Random. "I feel like going shopping today." You have no way of knowing that some freak is also at the mall and he''s torked and he''s got a gun. Then a couple hours later you''re stuck hiding in a clothes rack hoping police come in time to save you and your fellow shoppers, and maybe you''re trying to keep your kids hidden and to not cry.

No guarantee it will happen. But, no guarantee it won''t either. Some people live their whole lives and nothing happens, and that''s the way it *should* be, but it''s not the way it *is*. I''m sure some of those shoppers at the Omaha mall lived in relatively peaceful areas...but they weren''t IN their relatively peaceful areas-wrong place wrong time, and it can happen to anyone at any time. Maybe it''s a 1 in 10 million chance, but who is the 1 in 10 million person? I don''t want it to be me, my husband or my children.

I *assume* bad things won''t happen, but there will *always* be the very real possibility that it *could*. Not all strangers are BAD, but some are. Not all dogs bite, but some do.

I said it on the thread about little kids walking to school by themselves-I don''t want to be the parent/wife on tv crying and saying "But we live in such a quiet neighborhood-things like this NEVER happen here" If things like that NEVER happened "here" we would have no need for a police force. Anything can escalate-an innocent squabble over a tree branch in someone''s yard can escalate if given the opportunity-that''s why you see people on the news when something happens and they look STUNNED.

That''s not to say you have to set up a bunker in your basement and booby trap your house and drive an Army tank and wear a bullet proof vest to go get the mail. I just think it''s smart to be vigilant and aware that certain possibilities do exist, however remote.

 

[justginger]

I understand that under the 2nd amendment, one has the right to carry a firearm. However, I''m not sure how applicable it is to modern society. We are not in the era of "militias" taking care of our neighborhoods -- it is unacceptable for normal citizens to assume a position of power over their counterparts. To me, having a concealed weapon puts you in a position of power over me, unwillingly so. You may be mentally and emotionally competent to carry one when you receive your license, and then 2 years later when your wife is having sex with your brother, your kid has overdosed on heroin, and you lose your job -- you''re not so competent. And now the person who got the gun for protection is the one that innocent people on the subway need to take cover from. It''s cyclic -- people get guns for protection, and sometimes those very guns are the ones that OTHER people are getting guns for protection from!

I can see wanting to protect yourself. No one wants to allow someone to rape, murder, or maim them. However -- if we hadn''t ever gotten this far gone with firearms in the States in the first place, common citizens wouldn''t feel compelled to protect themselves with automatic weapons. In Australia, people are happy with a cricket bat next to the bed. I wish it could go back to that level of security in America.

 

[y2kitty]

No. If someone wants to hurt me they will do it whether I have a gun or not. That being said, its legal and in the constitution so I don''t care what you do in your homes. And I 100% agree with what Trillionaire said about guns escalating situations. However, I do wonder if having guns in your home with your children and saying they are for protection affects their mentality, like makes them think there are always people out there who want to hurt them.

 

[ericad]

We own a gun because my DH''s job requires him to be armed. I never wanted a gun in the house and wouldn''t have one under any other circumstances. I don''t object to responsible gun ownership, I just personally dislike guns. So it''s a reluctant yes from me.

 

[TravelingGal]

YES! I LOOOOVE GUNS! I want to buy an arsenal of them!

But I am BIG TIME against BULLETS/AMMO. They should be banned.


Yeah...no. Guns and people with tempers don''t mix.

 

[LadyBlue]

Date: 12/15/2009 7:46:16 AM
Author: justginger
I understand that under the 2nd amendment, one has the right to carry a firearm. However, I''m not sure how applicable it is to modern society. We are not in the era of ''militias'' taking care of our neighborhoods -- it is unacceptable for normal citizens to assume a position of power over their counterparts. To me, having a concealed weapon puts you in a position of power over me, unwillingly so. You may be mentally and emotionally competent to carry one when you receive your license, and then 2 years later when your wife is having sex with your brother, your kid has overdosed on heroin, and you lose your job -- you''re not so competent. And now the person who got the gun for protection is the one that innocent people on the subway need to take cover from. It''s cyclic -- people get guns for protection, and sometimes those very guns are the ones that OTHER people are getting guns for protection from!

I can see wanting to protect yourself. No one wants to allow someone to rape, murder, or maim them. However -- if we hadn''t ever gotten this far gone with firearms in the States in the first place, common citizens wouldn''t feel compelled to protect themselves with automatic weapons. In Australia, people are happy with a cricket bat next to the bed. I wish it could go back to that level of security in America.

This are my thoughts as well.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/13/2009 1:19:46 AM
Author: neatfreak
No way. Too dangerous with kids around and you''re more likely to have one of your household members killed or hurt than use it on an intruder.

Ditto.

 

[dragonfly411]

Date: 12/14/2009 4:46:08 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 12/14/2009 2:52:42 PM

Author: dragonfly411

Date: 12/14/2009 10:32:38 AM


Author: Cehrabehra


I don''t know of a SINGLE incidence where anyone I know was ever saved by a gun.




But I know four people who were murdered with guns (killed by a friend, a husband (murder suicide), husband (just murder), and a girlfriend''s father) and three others who shot themselves in the head.

I know of several instances where a gun has saved someone. Try having a 200-500lb hog run straight at you, with no gun and no trees around. I haven''t personally had this happen but my grandfather''s friend HAS and his gun probably saved at least a few limbs, if not his life.



Or how about when one of your dear pets, or children is attacked by coyotes, or a panther, or some other animal, even just the sound of that gunshot could make a fraction of a second''s difference, giving you the chance to save them.



SO''s uncle was walking in the woods once, and looked down and there was a rattle snake rearing back to bite him... if he hadn''t had his pistol, he''d be dead.



The guns aren''t the decision makers folks... we are.

The situations you are talking about are pretty drastically different than storing a handgun in your purse/drawer/whatever to ''protect'' yourself from an intruder.

Neat - The poster quoted GUN she did not say HANDGUN

 

[dragonfly411]

And actually the third scenario was a pistol and yes would be considered a handgun. So that DID save the man''s life.

I personally want to know that I can protect myself. I want to know that I have a way of disabling someone should they try to attack me, whether to rob me, rape me, or kill me.

 

[movie zombie]

i don''t care if others don''t want a gun, don''t feel they can be responsible as a gunowner, etc. i don''t want those people telling me that i can''t have a gun or am not responsible. gunownership means being responsible. there are many safes and gadgets for keeping guns safe. i grew up with them. i never thought they were a toy. i never played with them. my dad taught me responsible gunownership. my daughter was never aware of a gun in my house......or that i had a set of fine china for that matter [in a box in the closet as i never used it and still don''t]! however, i now enjoy my guns just like i enjoy my color stones. while throwing color stones at attackers won''t do me much good, that .45 acp or .357 mag will. and on the off chance that we have to take down a deer for food, well, i''ve got the rifle for that, too.

if i lived in an apartment in a city i''d not have higher calibre guns. too much danger of going through a wall. i repeat: being a gunowner means being responsible and knowing when its legal to shoot, what you''re shooting at, and where the bullet will go.

an interesting group: http://www.jpfo.org/
or for their philosphy:
http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/about.htm

jews for the proteciton of firearms ownership: they are certainly not interested in being victims again.

mz

 

[packrat]

What's interesting to me is that whenever I read in the paper about or see on the news about people wanting to ban guns or take guns from Joe Citizen (and in no way shape or form am I referring to anyone on HERE, I'm just saying, in the papers and in the news) nobody ever mentions that the TRUE threat, the TRUE place that needs to be concentrated on, is the fact that criminals have access to weapons. You can take every gun off the face of the planet from a law abiding citizen, you can take every knife, razor, taser, mace, baseball bat or whatever can be used as a weapon, away from decent law abiding people but that will NEVER make the world a better place. Ever. That leaves the rest of us standing w/our pants down, and scrambling for...a big book to throw? I don't want to be at the mercy of some piece of crap.

The problem will never be solved until the root is dug out, and I don't really see a lot of interest in taking things away from BAD people. Criminals don't operate on the right side of the law, so it's not like they'll go "oh well hey, I mean, if it's illegal, I really shouldn't have this here gun, I should go ahead and turn it in to the proper authorities." I'm quite certain they'll say "Rock on, let's go get some shit b/c I won't really be taking any chances that someone might actually fight back. 'Cept, we'll stay away from Missi and her family cuz you know, she's got that crusty bread and hard salami and she means business"

 

[Vancity]

To answer the original question, there are no guns in my home.

Although, my fiance may disagree with this claim...he''s always referring to the

''pistol in his pants''?

He discharges it often

 

[audball]

Date: 12/15/2009 3:19:08 PM
Author: packrat
What''s interesting to me is that whenever I read in the paper about or see on the news about people wanting to ban guns or take guns from Joe Citizen (and in no way shape or form am I referring to anyone on HERE, I''m just saying, in the papers and in the news) nobody ever mentions that the TRUE threat, the TRUE place that needs to be concentrated on, is the fact that criminals have access to weapons. You can take every gun off the face of the planet from a law abiding citizen, you can take every knife, razor, taser, mace, baseball bat or whatever can be used as a weapon, away from decent law abiding people but that will NEVER make the world a better place. Ever. That leaves the rest of us standing w/our pants down, and scrambling for...a big book to throw? I don''t want to be at the mercy of some piece of crap.


The problem will never be solved until the root is dug out, and I don''t really see a lot of interest in taking things away from BAD people. Criminals don''t operate on the right side of the law, so it''s not like they''ll go ''oh well hey, I mean, if it''s illegal, I really shouldn''t have this here gun, I should go ahead and turn it in to the proper authorities.'' I''m quite certain they''ll say ''Rock on, let''s go get some shit b/c I won''t really be taking any chances that someone might actually fight back. ''Cept, we''ll stay away from Missi and her family cuz you know, she''s got that crusty bread and hard salami and she means business''

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Date: 12/15/2009 7:46:16 AM
Author: justginger
I understand that under the 2nd amendment, one has the right to carry a firearm. However, I''m not sure how applicable it is to modern society. We are not in the era of ''militias'' taking care of our neighborhoods -- it is unacceptable for normal citizens to assume a position of power over their counterparts. To me, having a concealed weapon puts you in a position of power over me, unwillingly so. You may be mentally and emotionally competent to carry one when you receive your license, and then 2 years later when your wife is having sex with your brother, your kid has overdosed on heroin, and you lose your job -- you''re not so competent. And now the person who got the gun for protection is the one that innocent people on the subway need to take cover from. It''s cyclic -- people get guns for protection, and sometimes those very guns are the ones that OTHER people are getting guns for protection from!


I can see wanting to protect yourself. No one wants to allow someone to rape, murder, or maim them. However -- if we hadn''t ever gotten this far gone with firearms in the States in the first place, common citizens wouldn''t feel compelled to protect themselves with automatic weapons. In Australia, people are happy with a cricket bat next to the bed. I wish it could go back to that level of security in America.

In law school, the students were taught the benefits of trying to put oneself in the shoes of those who drafted the laws in order to divine and define the spirit and intent behind the rule of law.

As a result I am personally much more open-minded towards private, well-regulated ownership of state-of-the-art 18th century muskets, for instance.

 

[Pandora II]

As a non-American, it may suprise a few people, but I do own a gun although it is kept in my parent''s house not mine.

Only my father and I know where the gun cupboard is hidden, it''s police approved, locked, we both hold licences and we have both got many years experience with guns. I have a .22 rifle and he has a 12 bore shotgun.

When she is old enough I will teach Daisy how to shoot - I think it is a useful skill to learn and also learning to be responsible around guns can reduce the chance of any accidents.